Unbelievable! Four months of this! Aren’t you guys tired yet? I mean, I vote against the conspiracy theory all the way, and I admire the hell out of the folks still arguing against it despite the clear refusal of proponents to be swayed in any way by evidence. But it’s almost a little masochistic for both sides to keep hacking away here. On the other hand, you might be able to give the old free will threads a run for their money if you keep going. Not that there’s a prize or anything. Oh well, just thought I’d check in and see if there’s anything new here, but looks like not so I’ll let you get back to it.

mckenzievmd - 02 October 2007 06:06 PM

Unbelievable! Four months of this! Aren’t you guys tired yet? I mean, I vote against the conspiracy theory all the way,

I am not talking about any damn conspiracy theory!

I have built a 4 foot flexible model and video taped impacts against and created time lapsed sequences of it.  I am still in the process of video editing and making the sound track but I can demonstrate that the behavior of such a structure varies with the mass and distribution of mass.

I was building model rockets when I was in grammar school.  I won a National Merit Scholarship and applied to MIT.  I got an interview but not accepted but went to another school for electrical engineering so I didn’t study structural.  When I started reading the NIST reports I didn’t know what dead load and live load referred to.  I really do not consider this obvious failure to resolve this simple engineering problem to be a small matter in the country that put men on the moon.  Now if you want to believe I don’t know anything about physics you go right ahead.  I let my MENSA membership expire in the 80’s and I took their IQ test to get in.  I didn’t have to because all I had to do was get the documentation for my SAT scores.  I took the test with a friend becase she had to take it.

And I say the planes could not do it.  Certainly not in less than 2 hours.  I I don’t give a shit about Republicans, Democrats, Islam or Western Civilization.  The laws of physics run the universe screw human beings. 

psik

The purpose of the Center for Inquiry is to promote and defend reason, science, and freedom of inquiry in all areas of human endeavor.

What have you done lately, moderator?  The sad fact is that you would have just let this kid spout as much nonsense as he wanted all day long.  Why don’t you check back in when you can take the time to enter into the discussion?  Otherwise, leave your judgements to whatever argument you feel is worthy of your time and attention.

Wow, psikeyhackr, you sure seem worried about people thinking you’re stupid or ignorant! Never said nor implied that. I’ve checked in on the arguments from time to time, and I think the evidence is against you. I also think there’s not a chance in hell you’ll ever see it that way. I have no interest in an ongoing debate when there’s no hope of an agreement, but if it means that much to you, knock yourself out.

mckenzievmd - 02 October 2007 07:42 PM

Wow, psikeyhackr, you sure seem worried about people thinking you’re stupid or ignorant! Never said nor implied that. I’ve checked in on the arguments from time to time, and I think the evidence is against you.

Are you saying you searched the NIST reports and found where they turned up hard evidence of temperatures from the fires caused by the airplane high enough to weaken steel?

thinking you’re stupid or ignorant!

Now if I call someone else that because I actually think they are then you will get on my case. 

But that is what I think the NIST is, unless of course they are LIARS.

psik

Brennen, Brennen, Brennen, when will you learn that you can’t even respond to such topics with fundamentalists without it being seen as a confrontation? 

Occam

P.S.  Hey, Brennen, how about merging this thread with the free-will one?  That way, we would be sure it would win the prize for longerst thread.

O

Occam,

I know, I know. I’m just a little slow. 

I know I am joining this extremely late, and I am going to jump right in, bear with me.

The temperatures of the fire, were said to completely dissipate almost the entire plane but some random things like a wheel hubcap? And why is it that the massive plane only made one hole in the building, failing to shatter the WINDOWS around that hole? If that plane had enough force, and energy to turn steel into nothingness, you would imagine that it might do a LITTLE more damage? You can watch countless videos of the 9/11 attacks; the planes have distinctive features that are not of civilian airliners. One of the planes appears to have a strange set of equipment on the underside, not to mention a ‘bright flash’ the moment before it hits the building. Experts have analyzed these quite in-depth to find them coming from the planes. I have countless videos on this if anyone wants them.

rsonin gets on my case because I won’t make accusations about who did what.

I’m not on your case because you won’t make accusations.  I’m on your case because you reject an entirely plausible explanation without offering a more plausible alternative.  All you can say is “I don’t believe it.”  I don’t care what you can or can’t believe.

Plenty of people can’t believe that the Pentagon was even hit by a plane, despite insurmountable evidence.  I don’t care what they can or can’t believe.  I note that hundreds of witnesses saw a plane hit the building, that plane parts were found in the building, and so on.  Just because the real world does not behave as you expect is no reason to question the real world.  It is a reason to question what you expected.

And, for what it’s worth, I do think that you are ignorant of one thing here, and that is how these kinds of structures work as systems to take the loads that are placed on them.  Each element fits into an intricate system, and there is only so much of that system that can be eliminated before the whole thing fails.  If you have a table with five legs, you can usually remove two and the table will stand.  But remove a third, and all is lost.  That is what happened to the WTC.  The holes, in combination with the fire, weakened the structure of a small area (1-2% of the whole), and when that small part failed, it led to a chain reaction that brought the whole thing down.

How many bad sectors do you need on a hard drive before the whole thing is unusable?  Depends on the sectors, and if they are key, then the drive can fail even though most of it, by far, is in perfect woking order.

How many bad parts do you need in an engine before it fails? How many bridges do you need to bomb to paralyse your enemy’s railroads?  How many pages of a textbook need to be missing before the whole thing no longer makes sense - which pages?

If you have some plausible explanation as to why the towers should have remained standing longer than they did, than say so.

rsonin - 05 October 2007 12:56 AM

rsonin gets on my case because I won’t make accusations about who did what.

If you have some plausible explanation as to why the towers should have remained standing longer than they did, than say so.

If you have genuinely examined (not looked at, EXAMINED) the evidence presented by BOTH sides, the “plausibility” of the official story is far more difficult to believe.

Let me throw this out there; our biases and fears, human emotion, is the strongest force on this earth. I didn’t want to believe that the US Gov could do something like this, but there is only so much logic I can throw out the window to buy their story, period.

Don’t let your fear blind you from seeing the evidence. Yes, fear. Because whether you feel your are 110% right or not, that doesn’t change the fact that IF (in some other universe in some other dimension) the government is corrupt to that level, it royally buttf^(%$ everything you thought you knew about the way the country, and even the world, works.

And now for a video that is completely different.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0kUICwO93Q

No one else seems to be demanding to know the tons of steel and tons of concrete on every floor. 

The NIST tells us the building oscillated for 4 minutes.  How do you compute how much kinetic energy shook the entire building versus how much did structural damage at the point of impact?  Isn’t that necessary to do an accurate computer model?

psik